Summary report of the National Discrimination and Racism Monitor with a focus on poverty
What significance does racism have for the risk of poverty? This NaDiRa short report makes it possible for the first time in the German context to examine the risk of poverty of three racially marked groups - Asian, Muslim and Black people.
"In order to reduce the increased risk of poverty among racially marked people, racist structures and discrimination must be dismantled in various areas. Education and work must be equally rewarding for everyone."
The study
The task of NaDiRa is to systematically investigate the causes, extent and consequences of discrimination and racism. The question is therefore: Who is particularly at risk of poverty?
From January to March 2022 , the researchers conducted a representative survey (NaDiRa.panel), the researchers collected data from 21,000 people to investigate the attitudes and experiences of people in Germany .
This short report uses the respondents' self-identification as a basis for categorization, so that a distinction can be made in the analyses between people marked as racist and those not marked as racist.
The analyses reveal the extent to which the risk of poverty is linked to socio-demographic factors and the living situation of these groups. The NaDiRa data supplement poverty research with a perspective that is critical of racism by showing that a differentiation based on migration alone is not enough: Differentiation based on migration background alone is not enough. In order to ensure fairer participation of all groups , exclusion based on characteristics such as gender, skin color, language and religion must be taken into account.
Yes, racialized people have a higher risk of poverty than non-racialized people: Black, Asian and Muslim people in Germany are exposed to a higher risk of poverty than Germans without a migration background. While the at-risk-of-poverty rate is 9% for non-racially marked men and 10% for women, this applies to 26% of Black men and women, 30% and 26% of Asian men and women and 41% and 38% of Muslim men and women.
Yes, but a high level of education and employment do not equally protect racialized people from the risk of poverty: Higher educational attainment and full-time or part-time employment generally reduce the risk of poverty, but do not provide complete protection against it, especially for racially marked people.
The risk of living below the poverty line despite full-time employment is around four times higher for black women (22%), Muslim men (21%) , Asian men (19%) and Asian women (19%) than for men and women who are not racially marked (5%).
Having German citizenship can reduce the risk of poverty: this correlation can be found in all groups, although it is particularly evident among Black women and Black and Asian men. The findings of the report indicate that citizenship plays a role in institutional access, which in turn is a significant factor in the risk of poverty.
Who is particularly at risk of poverty?
The following analyses were carried out in order to indicate the average probability that the groups examined are considered to be at risk of poverty. Three models were calculated to show how the risk of being at risk of poverty changes for different groups when different factors are included in the calculations.
- Model 1 represents the unadjusted risk of poverty. This means that no factors other than group membership and gender are taken into account.
- Model 2 includes socio-demographic characteristics - age, age squared, marital status, number of children, level of education and region (western/eastern Germany) - in the analyses.
- Model 3 also includes employment status, which distinguishes, for example, between people who are in full-time employment, in training or retired.
The figures show that socio-demographic and employment-related characteristics influence the risk of poverty differently for different groups. Nevertheless, racially marked men and women are exposed to a higher risk of poverty than non-racially marked men and women, even after taking these factors into account.
When comparing groups, men show the following findings, among others:
- On average, men who are not racially marked (9%) have the lowest risk of poverty.
- The highest risk of poverty is found among Muslim men (in Model 1, the at-risk-of-poverty rate is 41% - i.e. it affects significantly more than one in three Muslim men).
In a group comparison, women show the following findings, among others:
- At 38%, the unadjusted poverty rate (Model1) is highest among Muslim women.
- In contrast to men, the risk of living below the poverty threshold is reduced for women as soon as the rate is adjusted for socio-demographics(model 2) and employment status(model 3) .
Figure 2 only shows those in full-time employment by group and gender, taking socio-demographic characteristics into account.
Compared to Figure 1, the probability of living below the poverty threshold is lower in all groups among those in full-time employment. However, there are still clear differences between racially marked persons and Germans without a migration background.
Differences between racially marked persons and Germans without a migration background :
- The difference between German men and women without a migration background (5% each) and Muslim men (21%) and Black women (22%) is the highest: more than 15 percentage points.
Figure 3 focuses on people who have completed tertiary education . This group includes people who have completed master craftsman training, a bachelor's or master's degree or a doctorate . In this specific group of people, the risk of poverty is lower than in the overall analysis (Figure 1).
The education factor is an important protection against the risk of poverty. However, the returns on education also differ strikingly here for the groups considered. Racially marked people have a significantly higher risk of poverty than men and women who are not racially marked, even with high educational qualifications.
Differences between racially marked people and Germans without a migration background:
- Women not racially marked (4%) and women with a migration background (7%) are not statistically significantly different from the group of men not racially marked (6%).
- Once again, the high risk of poverty among Muslim men (33%) and women (21%) stands out.
- Asian (18%) and Black men (15%) are also significantly more likely to live below the poverty risk.
Figure 4 allows a comparison between two groups: Migrants who obtained their degree abroad and racially marked people who were born in Germany and obtained their degree in Germany, where educational returns for migrants may be lower for degrees obtained abroad or a lack of German language skills. Although the risk of poverty for families with a history of immigration decreases over the course of generations , educational returns have less of an impact on subsequent generations with a migration background.
A group comparison shows the following results for men, among others:
- For Muslim men, the risk of poverty falls by a third (47% to 31%).
- For Asian men , the risk of poverty falls by around half (44% to 20%).
- For black men, the risk of poverty falls by almost two thirds (37% to 14%).
A group comparison shows the following findings for women, among others:
- The strongest decline can be found among Black women: In this group, the risk of poverty is reduced from 33 % to 5 %.
Similar conclusions can also be drawn with regard to nationality (Figure 5). German citizenship lowers the risk of poverty in all groups examined. Particular significance for the Muslim group: Citizenship is closely linked to institutional access to the labor market, housing market and social security systems. Around one fifth of the Muslim group most likely consists of refugees who have migrated to Germany since 2013.
Poverty risk decreases for the following groups:
- For black men , the risk of poverty decreases from 37% to 18%.
- For Asian men, the risk of poverty decreases from 45% to 22%.
- For Muslim women, the risk of poverty decreases from 36% to 21%.
- For Muslim men, the risk of poverty is reduced from 47% to 31%.
Restrictions on data collection
The at-risk-of-poverty rate in the NaDiRa.panel data is not directly comparable with the figures from the Federal Statistical Office for two reasons:
- The NaDiRa.panel includes people aged 18 to 70, which means that older people aged 71 and over are not included. The Federal Statistical Office records a significantly higher at-risk-of-poverty rate of 18.3% for people aged 65 and over. For this reason, the at-risk-of-poverty rate in this report appears lower compared to the overall population.
- The income survey in the NaDiRa.panel was kept open without specifying whether social benefits received should be counted as household income. When interpreting the results, it is therefore unclear whether the reported findings before or after taking social transfers into account should be understood as a risk of poverty.
Despite these limitations, the NaDiRa data provide an important addition to the existing poverty risks in the population. Previous reporting on the risk of poverty neglects to take a specific look at racially marked people.
Racism, poverty risk and health
Also interesting: ability to work also depends largely on health status. The latest NaDiRa report revealed that racially marked people are (racially) discriminated against when accessing healthcare in Germany (DeZIM 2023).
Recommendations for action
The results show that the inclusion of a racism-critical perspective in the investigation of the risk of poverty appears to be essential and that the differentiation according to immigration history is insufficient.
The results thus underline the need for targeted measures to combat poverty. In particular, the promotion of equal opportunities for disadvantaged groups.
- Dismantling racist structures and discrimination in education, work, health and the housing market is necessary.
- Promote living wage jobs through labor market policy.
- Recognition of all educational and professional qualifications acquired abroad.
- Promotion of educational and professional qualifications for all persons.